Category: Greed

Your past is always your past. Even if you try to forget it, it will remember you. Every place has its own history, and Nantucket, a small island of 14 miles is no exception. Now a fashionable resort with wide open beaches, Nantucket was once the ruthless whaling capital of the world and one of the wealthiest communities in America. Virtually eliminating the whale population wherever they voyaged with no regard to the environment, the Nantuckers sustained one of the bloodiest businesses in the world. However in the 18th century, the Nantuckers were able to get a glimpse of nature’s true power and a taste of the consequences of their barbarous acts. In 1821, a whaling ship encountered a small boat near the coast of Chile containing two deranged men surrounded by human bones. The two were among eight survivors of one of the most well-known marine disasters of the 19th century. With a mastery of language that rarely falters, Philbrick spins a ghastly, irresistible tale, depicting the vast amount of greed in the brutal whale business carried out in the 19th century, and makes a strong argument about the necessity of man remaining humble in the face of nature.

In ‘In the Heart of the Sea,’ Nathaniel Philbrick tells the chilling story of the 2 year journey of the whaleship Essex, a 240-ton Nantucket whaleship that was sunk by an 80-ton sperm whale. Of the 20 men aboard the two boats, only eight would remain alive through the ravages of thirst, hunger and desperation that beset the voyage. Philbrick begins with a brief history of Nantucket itself, providing information on the Nantucket whaling industry as well as the town economy’s dependence on whaling. With the description Philbrick conveys the punishing regimen of whaling itself, giving context to the story of the officers and crew members who embarked on the Essex. Philbrick then talks about the culture of ruthless greed that defined the Nantucket society at that time. Philbrick wrote, ‘No matter how much the inhabitants might try to hide it, there was a savagery about this island, a blood lust and pride that bound every mother, father and child in a clannish commitment to the hunt.” Disaster struck more than a year after the Essex’s departure. The ship was about 2,000 miles from the nearest coast looking for whales in a freshly discovered whaling area when a huge 80-ton sperm whale, suddenly rammed it. Although whales, even massive ones, usually flee in panic from a ship, this whale came right for the ship. It could have been possible that the first ramming may have been an accident with the whale mistaking the ship for another member of its species. However, the second attack was clearly intended, this mysterious whale came right back with even more rage and rammed the ship a second time, successfully sinking it. The crew members managed to get a small amount of food and water off the ship before it went down. With just three operational whaleboats, and thousands of miles of open sea to cross, what came was a voyage of shocking adversity, which the survivors survived by eating those who died.

Throughout the book Philbrick describes with emphasis the various acts of greed, exposing the horrendous consequences of Big Businesses being left to run awry. The whole whaling industry in the 19th century was driven by greed. As whale populations near whaling towns depleted, ships began to voyage farther and farther to more remote grounds in hope of filling up their hold with precious sperm whale oil. Why did Captain Pollard and First Mate Chase decide to sail thousands of miles west despite warning from shipwrecked Spaniards that claimed to have been attacked by a white whale? Greed. Greed didn’t limit itself to just the crew, the shipowners held profits above the irreplaceable lives of the crew as well. ‘One naval architect’s calculations project that if the Essex had been a new ship, her oak planking would have withstood even this tremendous blow. Since the whale did punch a hole in the bow, the Essex’s twenty-one-year-old planking must have been significantly weakened by rot or marine growth.’. Clearly this ghastly disaster could have been avoided if the shipowners garnered less greed and more prudence. Keeping off repairs until absolutely necessary contributed to the shipwreck and the lives lost. Philbrick shows the reader the impact of acts of greed through powerful imagery that has a lasting effect. Although this greed remains unchecked for the bulk of “In the Heart of the Sea”, there’s one thing that is certain — what goes around, comes around.

One of the powerful arguments made by Philbrick in the book is the need for man to remain humble in the face of nature. Throughout the book the whalers’ audacity in front of the natural world is shown – they believed that they were above all, the weather, the sea, and even its creatures. The image of a lone ship in a vast ocean gave a different statement. Often the story of The Essex is seen as the story of two men, Captain Pollard and First Mate Chase, at odds with each other. But this is not true; it is really the story of man against nature and nature saying, ‘No.’ The whalemen finally started to experience the consequences of their years of barbarous acts and suffer for their crimes. “Without their ship to protect them, the hunters had become the prey.” The whalemen learnt to respect nature the hard way. This is one of the arguments Philbrick develops throughout the book skillfully, showing the cruel acts committed against nature with vivid imagery Philbrick makes the reader reflect upon their own contribution to the unethical and perilous quest for dominion over nature and its resources.

“In The Heart Of The Sea” conveys two simple but profound messages; greed destroys, nature prevails. Nathaniel Philbrick does an amazing job of telling the story. Every story’s most important part is its lessons. Even for a history novel, there isn’t much of a moral lesson to be learnt. A short closing remark on the state of America’s economy due to greedy big businesses or the importance of environmentalism would have made the book a more contemporary read. However, the story itself, written so magnificently with multiple first person accounts, makes up for this lack of stress on the current lessons. In a world where the environment is being polluted at massive levels and big businesses are thriving, “In The Heart Of The Sea” is a must read for all ages. Not only is the story captivating and one that strikes awe, but it is also one that teaches us that every action has a reaction – we must think deeply about the negative impact we are creating on natural resources and how our greed might pay us back very soon into the future.

Introduction

Over the decade, greed universally, have always been subjected to various argument based on perspectives however, with the same end result. Often times it is seen as part of human nature with the societal belief that it is one of the major causes of criminal activities and the fall of man in the society.

As Wang and Murnighan (2011: 305) discussed, due to the lack of definitional clarity surrounding greed and challenges inherent in developing empirical measures, many researchers may have abandoned their interest in studying greed, as “studying other issues may be easier.” altough, Wang and Murnighan also suggest that “extensive research on greed could be particularly fruitful” (2011: 307)

Murnighan Keith J. and Long Wang. 2012. In their article titled On greed explained that “Greed is a central element in human existence, it is also frequently mentioned as a factor in many recent organizational and financial scandals. Thus, it was surprising to discover that empirical research on greed is rare. In contrast, however, a variety of different literatures present a rich conceptual foundation for understanding the dynamics of greed and greedy behavior.”

The Concept of Greed

(Wang & Murnighan 2011) explains that although greed has a long intellectual history, our review of the literature led to a rather surprising observation: empirical research on the personal and social dynamics of greed is rare. It could be said that one of the reasons for this lack of research begins with the difficulties that surround the idea of defining greed. This assertion evolves with different names attached or synonymous to greed as explained by (Tickle, 2004). that Greed can wear a cloak with many different names, e.g., grasping, avarice, covetousness, miserliness, gluttony, lust, overreaching ambition, and/or desire spun out of control. In many situations, self-interest or selfishness seems synonymous, but not detailed in defining greed. According to (Wang & Murnighan 2011), when self-interest ends and when greed starts; its exact demarcation remains elusive.

Greed is not only one of the seven cardinal sins, it may be “the matriarch of the Deadly Clan,” i.e., the basic root and ultimate source of all seven. The other six are pride, envy, sloth, gluttony, lust, and anger. (Tickle, 2004). Tickle explain the seven cardinal sins in which greed serves as the bedrock or foundation for all. It is expedient to reveal that greediness is that one thing in human nature that propels other sinful nature to action. As explained in the New Testament suggests that “the love of money is the root of all evil.” This can be simply put that the love of money is being greedy in which biblically, it is one of the fruit of the flesh which defines sin. The assertion of the New Testament is in accordance to Buddhist thought: “Whoever is free from attachment knows neither grief nor fear. From greed comes grief; from greed comes fear” (Fetherston, 2000: 30). This explains that human existence needs to be free from excessive desire to have something. Such desire is able to make human forget their grief and fear thus, when this toe are out of human life, greed will be present.

Murnighan (2012) opines that the roots of irrepressible and unbridled greed may rest in the nature of human beings this assertion supports (Robertson, 2001) our instincts for self-preservation may have contributed to the emergence of greed and fueled its widespread existence. Murnighan explains that greed and human existence cannot be divided because human shelters greed, this fact causes was mention by Roberts who said that self-preservation or perhaps selfish interest led to the existence and widespread of greed.

Manfred F. R. (2016:1) explained that like lust and gluttony, greed is a sin of excess. As a personality characteristic, it usually manifests itself as an irresistible craving to possess more of something (money, material goods, power or other symbols of wealth) than is needed. To greedy people, the acquisition of possessions is central – it ends up being the only thing that counts…greedy people need material things to be happy; wealth is essential to be seen as successful.

Merriam-Webster’s dictionary defines greed as “a selfish and excessive desire for more of something: basically material things than is needed. Similarly, Balot (2001; 1) used a similar definition: “an excessive desire to get more … a primarily materialistic type of desire. This explains that greed is not beyond the physical. However, the behavioral attribute of greed is relative, that is, what seems excessive to one person might be modest to another. Thus, human perspective differs.

Greed can therefore be summarized as Jeevan D’Souza (2015) argues that greed is the direct outcome of dissatisfaction, emptiness, and discontentment. To fill this emptiness and discontentment, the greedy individual then acts in ways to acquire more resources, admiration and power, often at the cost of the happiness of other individuals. Hence, greed therefore has the whole and sole power to give human long suffering evolving after temporary happiness.

Historical/Philosophical Perspective of Greed

Manfred F. R. (2016:10) discussed that from the evolutionary point of view (wealth being an important signifier of power and status), greed can be seen as nothing other than a biological imperative, albeit stemming from the darker side of human nature. Like animals, we are concerned about having enough to survive in times when resources are scarce. Hoarding offers an evolutionary advantage by creating a safety net. Seen from this angle, we could interpret greed as deeply rooted in human nature, and therefore may understand why it occupies such a central position (Goldberg, 1994; Gigantes, 2002) – it is nothing more than an extension of the survival instinct.

(Balot, 2001) revealed that in Plato’s Portrait of Callicles, he pointed out that greed (Pleonexia: Excessive or insatiable greed, avarice, covetousness, the desire to have more, a greedy desire for certain goods.) is rooted in human physicality while Aristotle agreed, echoing Plato’s notion that people have natural acquisitive desires.

Murnighan (2012). Explaining Plato’s summary of Socrates’ dialogues in The Republic suggests two complementary approaches to greed. First, greed leads to immoral and unjust actions. Second, greed even hurts the people whose greedy acts have been successful. Like Solon and Herodotus, Plato argued that justice creates human happiness; greed and injustice undermine and destroy it. Plato emphasized the role of “psychic health” or “psychic harmony” as a structure that fosters justice and inhibits greed within individuals’ souls. Thus, a person with a just and healthy soul would necessarily refrain from immoral and greedy behaviors.

Murnighan continued in his explanation that Aristotle contended that individuals often confuse their true and natural needs of acquiring strictly necessary goods (telos) with the perceived needs of maximizing profit. Thus, people may acquire more simply because they want more than others and more than they deserve or need. Aristotle also noted that individuals often judge others’ behaviors to be greedy only to justify their own greedy action. This notion is also reflected in an Old Dutch proverb, “An inn-keeper trusts his guests only as much as he trusts himself.” This makes greed a practical problem of individual behavior as well as a potential virus in a community or society’s interactions. Like Plato and Aristotle, Thucydides treated greed as a universal facet of human nature. His analysis was multi-faceted: on the one hand, he noted greed’s negative attributes, e.g., the pursuit of individual self-interest and the cause of mistrust; on the other hand, he may have been the first to note that greed might also drive human progress. He felt, for instance, that greed was the motivator behind Athenian imperialism and the creation of their extensive empire.

Furthermore, Kant defined greedy avarice as “acquiring the means of good living in excess of one’s true needs” (Kant, 1796/1964: 96). He attributed it to self-seeking, especially the insatiable acquisition of wealth for the purpose of sumptuous living… Most other ancient and contemporary philosophers have viewed greed as iniquitous and immoral, commonly identifying it as the cause of vices, evil, and misery (Faust, 2006).

Psychological Perspective of Greed

Allport (1954; 5) defined social psychology as a “scientific attempt to understand and explain how the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of individuals are influenced by the actual, imagined, or implied presence of other human beings. This assertion make it know that greed is not just only about the physical manifestation but rather there are some things that has happened in the human body prior to the manifestation of greed. However, this acts starts from the mind which is the major part of human that triggers action. Before the physical (the act), the emotional (feeling) and the psychological (reasoning). This three works together. This three acts is explored by social psychology in knowing how greed actually started. However, according to Murnighan (2012). He said that social psychological research has not yet specified the basic psychological mechanisms that drive greed.

Manfred F. R. (2016) gave an illustration in his work …there are also instances where the caregivers have the financial resources to do what they are supposed to do, but substitute material “things” for care and concern. But by acting in this way they also communicate that they cannot give the child what it really needs — love and affection. When that happens, it should come as no surprise that these children (and later as adults) never feel satisfied. Buttressing this (Weil,1953): Depending on the family set-up, greed is often rooted in past, unmet infantile needs, where lack of attention, care and recognition plays a major role. Greedy people are being deprived of some certain things in their child hood, the desire of having those things either material or not builds up in them right from child hood. The more this desire grow it becomes excessive and then turns out to be greed which such person would not mind going extra mile to satisfy their desire or “id”: the one of the three divisions of the psyche in psychoanalytic theory that is completely unconscious and is the source of psychic energy derived from instinctual needs and drives compare ego superego. The distinct lack of parental love and support to which they are exposed creates deep feelings of anxiety, vulnerability, and insecurity. According to Manfred, This feeling becomes part of their inner theatre, fuelling an urge to find substitutes for what they feel they may be lacking. Their early negative experiences leave them in a constant state of being needy, of never feeling satisfied, laying the foundations for poor socio-emotional adaptation. The drive to acquire has become a survival mechanism for these people. (Callahan, 1994) Their feeling of never having enough not only ruins their own lives but can cause serious collateral damage. (Nikelly, 2006) uses psychoanalyses to understand the concept of greed and acquisitive behavior and infers that there are strong correlations between early negative attachment styles and acquisitive behavior…Greed has a strong correlation with fear, guilt and pain caused by psychological imbalances during childhood development. This act Freud identified as a mental disorder and strongly correlated greed with narcissism and meta-pathology (Freud, 1914)

Biblical Perspective of Greed

All reference in this part of the essay will be from the Holy book of the Christians: The bible. The bible expressively explain greed as one of the sinful nature of man. And one of the reason man fail in its society. A times death such in the case of Ananias and sapphire (Acts 5:1-11). Their greedy act led particularly because of money to their death. This act establish the saying in Matthew 6:24: “No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other.

The comparison is between two masters which is God and money. Money, is from the Aramaic word mammon, which indicates the animating power behind greed, money, and wealth. Money is a substitute god. You cannot serve both God and Money. The former is moral while the latter is immoral thus a manifestation of the sinful nature. Greed is seen as sin because it works with unclean acts as written in Ephesians 4:19.

Isaiah 56:11: yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way, everyone for his own gain, from his quarter. This biblical facts likened greedy people to dogs. When dog is eating food particularly bone, it create a territory for itself in which no other dog can go close to so as to have the bone only to itself. Just as in such of man, man’s greedy behavior only brings up selfish act, only concerned about himself/herself, focusing only on his/her life only at the detriment of others sadness.

Jude 1:11 asserts that the greedy people are cursed. The verse starts with “woe unto them”. It establish greedy people as the linage of Cain who greedily present bad offering before God which led to the killing of his brother Abel. He was cursed such is the case of all greedy people biblically.

Greed, Human and the Society

Greed, Human and the society are three different entities that are interwoven. They are move on a parallel lines but meet at the end. Greed defines human in its existence while Human manifestation of greed defines the society. Murnighan (2012) posits that the roots of irrepressible and unbridled greed may rest in the nature of human beings Murnighan in his explanation reveals that greed is part of human identity, it is an inbuilt thing which most times its manifestations or actions cannot be limited. Also, (Robertson, 2001) opines that our instincts for self-preservation may have contributed to the emergence of greed and fueled its widespread existence. This means that to be self-secured in our wants, needs or desires, the existence of greed is inevitable in the society.

Greed is one thing that is present in every one called human in relation to all aspect of life either politics, academics, religion, economics etc. most times humans criticize and castigate each other due to greedy behavior forgetting it is an inbuilt thing which is also in them. Observers are willing to castigate what they see as other individuals’ greed without recognizing its existence in their own lives- Murnighan (2012). However, it is important to note that the level of greediness in human varies.

Manfred in Greed syndrome asserts that we know that possessions can bring pleasure, but also that pleasure can become addictive. Given greed’s ability to provide transitory pleasure, no wonder it has invited comparisons with addictions such as drugs, sex, food or gambling. But as is the case with all drugs, a “fix” gives only a temporary high. Greed “junkies” always want more of what gets them high, more of what gives them pleasure, more of what enables them to escape from anxiety, from suffering, or from themselves. But as with those other addictions, greed can also destroy lives and sever ties. Manfred assertion explains that human pleasure calls for greedy activities which many times can be addictive. He compares greed addiction to that of sex, drugs and the likes all in the name of pleasure but in greed perspective it is likened to self-satisfaction just as drugs makes the victims temporarily high. He concluded that greed can go a long way in destroying lives due to its consequences also one major effect of greed is that it break ties thereby destroying communal love in the society. Thus aside from breaking ties, greed can create bigger troubles such as corruption, hostility, even war. This is evident in (Jeevan 2015) statement that Human greed has been responsible for much of human suffering at both the community and global level.

(Nikelly, 2006) posits that greed has a strong correlation with fear, guilt and pain caused by psychological imbalances during childhood development. (Crocker & Blanton, 1999) further explained that this fears are further exacerbated by social inequalities that directly affect self-esteem. The assertions above explains that during growth, some psychological factors such as guilt, pain and fear has it way in working with greed. As a child grows to know its society, this factors affects it self-esteem by lowering it. In a bid to gain satisfaction in line with the wants of the society, desire to have more than needed sets in.

Greed can completely change someone’s life and manipulate them into doing absurd actions that can ruin lives, no matter what the result. I believe that greed is a bad thing when it is taken too far, but some people do not agree with me. The novella The Pearl, and the movie speech by Charlie Chaplin, “The Great Dictator” both show how greed is good and bad. Greed is good when a person is determined, but it is a bad thing when it’s excessive and gets to someone’s head. The idea of wanting more is great, but it becomes a problem when it’s taken too far.

In The Pearl, greed consumed Kino, and it was as if he couldn’t make decisions for himself, and everything he did was based on his fortune, the pearl. For example, when Kino went to the pearl buyers to sell the pearl they offered him fifteen hundred dollars. Kino refused this offer even though it was a lot of money and would’ve benefited him, he wanted more than that. Kino’s mind was corrupted with the idea of wealth and living a luxurious life, which was the opposite of what he was living now. This mindset resulted in him giving up the money because he felt that he needed more. On page 52, Kino says, “My pearl is not for sale here.”. Any other pauper in Kino’s situation would’ve gladly taken the money, but the idea of living like the rich corrupted his mind. He was hung up on achieving a future of wealth that only the pearl could make possible. Kino was also putting the pearl before his family’s well-being. One night, Juana decided that the pearl was evil, and she didn’t want it to cause any more trouble to them and destroy her family. She snuck out of the house one night and attempts to throw the pearl into the shore, but Kino followed her and stopped her. He grabbed the pearl from her, while punching her in the face and kicking her in her side. Kino heads home but on the way he gets jumped by two men, he kills one of them so he could survive. Kino says, “No one shall take our good fortune from us.”. Kino’s obsession and greediness caused him to go against his family and beat up Juana, and also commit murder.

In the movie speech by Charlie Chaplin, “The Great Dictator”, the quote, “Greed has poisoned men’s souls, has barricaded the world with hate, has goose-stepped us into misery and bloodshed.” shows how an excessive amount of greed can become a bad thing. It shows this since, it is portraying how once greed comes into your life it’s hard to escape it. Greed can make you not think of anything else and only on one thing whether it’s money, or a valuable object, greed will make you put these things before your loved ones. In “The Great Dictator”, it also shows how greed has overcome the hospitality and kindness of humans, it explains how all the kindness disappeared and is replaced with misery and greed. Another quote is, “We think too much and feel too little. More than machinery, we need humanity. More than cleverness, we need kindness and gentleness. Without these qualities life will be violent and all will be lost.”. This quote explains how we need to show kindness to one another and that we should value each other more than any object. Greed can make value objects more important than your family and friends, and that object is the only thing that you think about.

I may believe that greed is evil, but another perspective that exists is that greed is not always a bad thing. People believe that greed is good when you are determined to get something done. Also, that it is good to want more but now when it is taken advantage of and it gets excessive. A quote from The Pearl that supports that greed is good is, “..whereas…it is one of the greatest talents the species has and one that has made it superior to animals that are satisfied with what they have.”. This quote shows that greed is one of the greatest talents because, it is a good thing to want more and to try to do better for yourself. It also explains how greed is not a bad thing when you are motivated and determined to get something done. Greed only becomes a bad thing when it is excessive and gets too someone’s head. Some people also believe that people are not born with a bad greedy mindset and that it is developed . For example, in The Pearl, Kino was very simple and was happy with what he had, his son Coyotito and his wife Juana. When Kino discovered the pearl he thought that it would add onto the happiness already present in his life, but it was the opposite of what he imagined. A quote that from “The Great Dictator” that portrays this is, “We all want to help one another, human beings are like that. We want to love by each other’s happiness, not by each others misery.”.

In conclusion, greed is a very manipulative and awful thing to get stuck with, and once you are greedy, it’s hard to escape it. Overall, greed is not a good thing, and it can make you do things that can have a poor long lasting effect on your life. In The Pearl, it took Coyotito’s death for Kino to realize how greedy he was and how evil the pearl really is.

Abstract

Greed has been responsible for poisoning the morals and mindsets of mankind since the beginning of time. The want for more often spreads like an infectious disease amongst those who contract it. In both “How Much Land Does a Man Need” by Leo Tolstoy and Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller, corruption caused by greed is explored and leads to the main characters’ ultimate demise. Greediness was both prevalent and cautioned during the respective time periods in which these pieces were written with “How Much Land Does a Man Need” being set in the early stages of socialism in the Soviet Union, and Death of a Salesman being set in post WWII industrial America. The only difference in how the wanting of more is portrayed within these pieces is the greed of an individual shown in “How Much Land Does a Man Need” versus the greed of society shown in Death of a Salesman.

Greed Within the Works and its Cultural Context

Greed is shown to corrupt all it touches; it seems to have a reverse Midas effect. This corruption is explored in both “How Much Land Does a Man Need” by Leo Tolstoy and Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller. Within “How Much Land Does a Man Need” the wanting that controls the main character, Pahom, comes from within. Pahom is hungry for more land: “‘Our only trouble is that we haven’t land enough. If I had plenty of land, I shouldn’t fear the Devil himself!’” (Tolstoy, 2005) This hunger grows as Pahom learns of better opportunities that his neighbors are exposed to: “Presently Pahom heard that a neighbor of his was buying fifty acres, and that the lady had consented to accept one half in cash and to wait a year for the other half. Pahom felt envious.” (Tolstoy, 2005) This envious mindset continues to grow with each new opportunity for more land: “Pahom’s heart kindled with desire. He thought: ‘Why should I suffer in this narrow hole, if one can live so well elsewhere?’” (Tolstoy, 2005) Even when Pahom has gathered enough land and wealth to be happy and self sufficient, his desire burns for more: “At first, in the bustle of building and settling down, Pahom was pleased with it all, but when he got used to it he began to think that even here he had not enough land.” (Tolstoy, 2005) Finally, it seems, Pahom is met with a deal that will satisfy his never-ending thirst: “‘They wish me to tell you that in return for your presents they will gladly give you as much land as you want. You have only to point it out with your hand and it is yours.’” (Tolstoy, 2005) Pahoms response to this amazing deal is filled to the brim with greed: “‘How can I take as much as I like?’ thought Pahom.” (Tolstoy, 2005) In his quest blinded by greed, Pahom dies an untimely death: “‘There is plenty of land,’ thought he, ‘but will God let me live on it? I have lost my life, I have lost my life! I shall never reach that spot!’” (Tolstoy, 2005), “Pahom’s servant came running up and tried to raise him, but he saw that blood was flowing from his mouth. Pahom was dead!” (Tolstoy, 2005) The direct correlation between Pahom’s immense greed and his unfortunate death is made to warn audiences of the dangerous effects greed can have. Selfishness and greed will lead to destruction and death.

During the time period in which “How Much Land Does a Man Need?” was published, Leo Tolstoy was struggling politically with his home country, Russia: “His pamphleteering on social, political, and economic subjects resulted in the censorship of his work by the government.” (Hall, 1981) Socialism was sweeping the country and Tolstoy’s work often reflected the political atmosphere, in hopes of remaining in good graces with his government: “Critics often discuss the manner in which this ideological development is demonstrated in his works-from the early, apolitical writings to his later novels that exemplify the principles of Socialist Realism in their depiction of the Soviet ‘new man’ and in their government-prescribed interpretations of history.” (Poupard & Person, 1985) Within “How Much Land Does a Man Need”, the capitalist mentality of wanting more is preached against due to Russia’s anti-capitalist values, and Tolstoy was faced with criticism for this choice: “Tolstoy was a prolific author whose numerous patriots essays and works of fiction extolling Soviet life earned him a favored position with the government, and for that reason he was widely accused by other writers of political opportunism.” (Poupard & Person, 1985)

Within Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller, greed is shown to poison individuals through the American Dream, a capitalistic idea that entails capturing the most successful life: success being in terms of capitalistic prosperity.

“Traces of the American Dream are rooted in 19th-century America. However, it was the historian James Truslow Adams who coined the term in his The Epic of America (1931, p.16). He defined the American Dream as the pursuit ‘of a better, richer, and happier life for all our citizens of every rank which is the greatest contribution we have as yet made to the thought and welfare of the world’ (20).” (Mgamis, 2017)

Within the time period in which Death of a Salesman was published, post WWII industrialism was in full affect, and America was experiencing a change in societal values: “However, by the time the play was published, and in the wake of the industrial progress that was witnessed, America was witnessing a radical shift in social and economic values. There was a considerable level of shift from individualism to social conformity.” (Mgamis, 2017) The American Dream can be destructive to those who try to pursue it, often times leading to hardship for individuals: “Although they were positive in nature, these interests were not without negative impact on the lives of the people. It led to extreme focus on materialism, perfection and fantasy on the expense of humanitarian and realistic values.” (Mgamis, 2017) Within Death of a Salesman, Arthur Miller discusses the greed caused by the American Dream:

“Arthur Miller’s Death of a Salesman provides a vivid commentary on the American Dream. In the play, Miller criticizes the American materialism, and the self delusion that people are afflicted with. His critique is not directed at the American Dream as such, rather it targets the greed that some people show in demonstrating their dreams for wealth and health.” (Mgamis, 2017)

In Death of a Salesman, the character Howard Wagner perfectly symbolizes this greed by discarding Willy like a piece of trash despite the decades of work he had put into Howard’s company: “‘I appreciate that, Willy, but there just is no spot here for you. If I had a spot I’d slam you right in, but I just don’t have a single solitary spot.’” (Miller, 1998) Willy tries to connect with Howard Wagner on a human level, “‘You mustn’t tell me you’ve got people to see-I put thirty-four years into this firm, Howard, and now I can’t pay my insurance! You can’t eat the orange and throw the peel away-a man is not a piece of fruit!’” (Miller, 1998), but Howard’s greed blinds him from Willy’s plea: “‘No, but it’s business, kid, and everybody’s gotta pull his own weight.’” (Miller, 1998) Due to the relentlessness of capitalism and the American Dream, Willy begins to value it his life quite literally- only focusing on what he has to offer monetarily. This leads to his unfrontunate suicide in order for his family to claim his life insurance: “‘Can you imagine that magnificence with twenty thousand dollars in his pocket?’” (Miller, 1998) The greed of the world and of outside influences corrupt Willy into only seeing himself in monetary terms, causing him to end his own life. This is the perfect example of tragedy caused by greed.

Conclusion

Greed is a dangerous attribute, one that can negatively impact those it infects. Within Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller and “How Much Land Does a Man Need?” by Leo Tolstoy, the negative effects of greed are portrayed in the ultimate light: as leading to death. The greed of society causes Willy Loman to commit suicide, and the greed from within Pahom causes his untimely death. Due to the economic atmosphere of the respective time periods in which these works were written, both Arthur Miller and Leo Tolstoy warn audiences about the dangers of succumbing to greed.

References

1. Tolstoy, L. (2005). How Much Land Does a Man Need?. In McCambridge, P., Marshall, K.E., & Mongello, L. (Eds.), Holt Elements of Literature: Sixth Course (pp. 120-142). Austin, TX: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
2. Poupard, D., & Person, J.E. (Eds.). (1985). Alexy Nikolayevich Tolstoy (1883-1945). Detroit, MI: Gale Research Company.
3. Hall, S.K. (Ed.). (1981). (Count) Leo (Lev Nikolaevich) Tolstoy (1828-1910). Detroit, MI: Gale Research Company.
4. Miller, A. (1998). Death of a Salesman (20th ed.). New York: Penguin Group.
5. Mgamis, M.S. (2017). Death of a Salesman: Critique of the American Dream. International Journal of LAnguage and Literature, 5, 69-71. Doi: 10.15640/ijll.v5n1a9

The greatest flaw of man makes up different categories. In the play Macbeth by William Shakespeare, the greatest flaw of man is greed because in the real world such as man, they all self desire themselves and care more about their power and their pursuit of happiness instead of caring about other people’s values more than their own.

Macbeth is a brave soldier and powerful. He is easily tempted into murder to fulfill his desire to thte throne. He becomes truly evil when trying to protect his position to become king. Macbeths flaws are shown in the play to be greedy. He lets some people take advantage of him and is not treated like a normal human being. Macbeth is aware of this flaw but ignores what his conscience tells him. Macbeth goes for what he wants, no matter if people have to die because of it. The greatest flaw of man is greed because it shows how desirable man can be to be able to get what they want. An example to support this idea is from Macbeth.Macbeth’s flaw is greed and it leads to his downfall. He brings his death upon himself from the beginning to the end of the play.

Macbeth mentions “Stars hide your fires, Let not light see my black and deep desires”(Act 1 Scene IV). People in the world like that only make themselves feel better on the outside but on the inside they are feeling depressed. As for Macbeth, the light into black and deep desires represents Macbeth’s greed entirely. He is referring to how he wishes his true intentions of becoming king and gaining power. In the play, Macbeth shows this when the central character is given the opportunity to acquire more power and then becomes greedy, forcing him to make decisions that he would not normally make.

Macbeth argues “Vaulting ambition itself falls on the other”(Act 1 Scene VII). This quote is important because it shows how greedy Macbeth is. Greed is part of Macbeth’s desire to try to get things even when he didn’t even need to do those crucial actions. Towards the end, it did not serve any good purpose in the other characters’ lives; however, the advancement of the power itself connects to Macbeth showing how he realizes that he is overly greedy with wanting to kill Duncan. He learns that if people are too greedy, high chances are anyone who is that greedy will end up in a bad situation.

Greed is a human emotion that needs to be controlled. One of the characters in the play named Malcolm states, “I grant him bloody, Luxurious, false smacking of sin that has a name.”(Act 4 Scene III Line 72) . This quote proves how the greatest flaw of man is greed from expressing in further detail how greedy Macbeth is; he is being described as someone who contains every last evil there ever could be in the world. During the point of view in this time of the play, both Malcolm and Macduff had realized that he was deceiving everyone, while living in the luxurious lifestyle as a king. They relate his personality and actions to the one word that describes him best, greed. Macbeth takes the advantage of the King and his close friend to get where he wants to be. He made the decision to kill both Malcolm and Macduffs family when he thinks that they might cause him to lose his crown. In the quote, Malcolm is saying straight forward that Macbeth committed a sin. A sin that exemplifies selfishness and spreading hate and jealousy on other people( the characters). He spreads hate because Macbeth feels a decrease in power. He is so determined to be getting the crown that he would commit destruction as well who seems to stand in his way. His emotions point towards receiving happiness by becoming king. If that happiness is not achieved, he would lean towards loss of power and pride.

To further support the idea of the greatest flaw of man for greed, another example that simplifies greed as a human relation topic is the poem Richard Cory written by Edwin Robinson. The story is about a man who seems to have it all. He has everything a natural human can ever imagine to have , but takes things handed to him for granted and appears to be unappreciative. The central theme of this poem is that wealth and status does not ensure happiness. Richard Cory buys his happiness with having money but by the fact, money cannot buy happiness. He is perfect on the outside but carries darkness in him. “ He still fluttered pulses when he talks and glittered when he walked” (Robinson line 8) This quote is important because with this greatest flaw, he seemed to try to make himself look and feel good about himself by keeping his ego alive but deep down ,instead, it destroyed him. “ We thought he was everything wishing we were in his place.”(Robinson line 12). Relating back to Macbeth, what these two men have in common is greed. They both have a flaw to have something, to say something about themselves that would make themselves feel valuable whether it is money, power, or a sole to the crown. They have an intense desire to feel selfish to get what they want.

In conclusion , the greatest flaw of man is greed. In the man’s mind, they themselves desire themselves to become wealthy with power,pride, fame, anything that could relate to a man’s fortune to own. This connection can also relate to society with the appearance versus reality theme. Specifically, many people greed for more than what they need. Greed is not the route to happiness.

Everyone wishes to get at least one thing that they don’t have, like to want a new car, new computer, new house, or anything it is. Most people are inclined to do something it takes to get it, that itself is greed. In economics, we regularly count on people who rationally seeking their personal interests. But greed, the selfish and excessive desire for more than is needed, is no longer a virtue. Without greed, a person, a community or a society may lack the motivation to build or achieve. However, the difference between greed and self-interest tends to disturb people. Self- interest is where you use your own gifts, talents and resources to help others. But somehow self- interest sometimes becomes greed when it’s taken too far. You’ll always be greedy even if you don’t want to.

In video part 2, where we saw Bill Gates, the richest man in the world, create a software that solves money and time and creates thousands of jobs for other people. In return, he earned a lot of money, but by earning a lot of money, the rest lost the chance to earn that money, NO. Everyone in the world wants to get rich. Some people will say it’s bad and evil, but I think it’s good because it gives everyone the dream of making it big. Once people started to think that greed is good, everyone competes with each other.

Greed causes companies to compete, everybody wants to be rated number one by consumers and this greed leads to more productivity and innovation. If you came second in a competition, you would think it wasn’t good enough and try to come first in the next one. You wouldn’t want that without greed, in fact there wouldn’t be any contests.

Greed is good, because it is the most important incentive for people to work hard, get a good education, start a business It makes people productive and contributing members of society. And in return, people are paid a salary called the profit incentive and with that money, you can live a more comfortable live and hopefully build wealth. Some will argue that rich people are always greedy, this can be true but not always.

Greed is good overall. It encourages people to work harder. Even in the world of business and the economy, greed makes people want to compete with other companies. Therefore, the company tries to produce better products at cheaper prices. This benefits the company because it gets more money and benefits the consumers because it gets the product they want.

The movie ‘Wall Street’ is an iconic American movie that was directed by Stone, O. At the beginning of the movie, the street began to take us to the forefront of a business that has recently seen its once-declining values ​​and ethics. the foundation of American business. The movie addresses a lot of ethical issues at the time, which I think makes the movie even better. This movie has two main characters, one of them being Gordon Gekko, a wealthy and unscrupulous businessman, and Bud Fox, a young and dynamic stockbroker. The main focus of the movie’s economics is how greed contributes to our society.

We open up the film with Bud Fox, which he spends it working non stop calling people to sell them stocks and to give them investment plans. He was really desperate to get to be the top broker. He said “Your goal is to sell shares” to Gekko, make them your client. Bud is a very young stockbroker who comes from a working family and Gekko is just a millionaire whom Bud admires very much, so much that he even wants to associate with. Bud’s father is an airline maintenance foreman. He works for the airline ‘Blue-star’, which has a prominent role in the film. Bud is so desperate to make Gekko his client that he comes to his office early one morning to wish him his birthday and offers him some stocks that he had been analyzing for some time. However, Gekko doesn’t seem impressed. Realizing that Gekko may not be doing business with him, he relays ‘inside information’ about the Blue-star airlines where his father works. The information is that the Airline was involved in some accident case and that the airline will be exonerated in that case of accident and, therefore, will overcome the suspension and will seek to expand services.

A grateful Gekko takes Bud under his wing, but forces him to search for new information by any means necessary, including becoming a partner with a cleaning company to access confidential files in the offices of the cleaning company’s clients. Thus, to get rich, Bud resorts to the wrong means. Bud grows rich and enjoys the benefits Gekko promised, including a corner office with a view, a penthouse on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. Gekko asks Bud to buy large amounts of shares in a paper company, Teldar, a bankrupt company that Gekko wants to acquire and reverse. Bud does this by recruiting his friends as bogus buyers of the shares and giving them a cut of the proceeds (here he also uses his friends as a means of supporting his crimes by offering them a part of their salary. Explains bribery, another ethical issue). It is at Faldar’s annual s-hareholders’ meeting that Gekko gives his infamous ‘Greed is good ” speech. There is a famous quote that Douglas goes like this: “Greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed erases, passes through and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all its forms – greed for life, for money, for love, for knowledge – has marked the rise of humanity. And greed, remember my words, will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the United States.’ These speeches are great for people who need motivation to get to their goal. Sometimes greed is one of the ways to get to the top.

Meanwhile, Bud gains total confidence in his boss. Suggest an idea to Gekko. The plan was to buy Blue-star airlines and expand them using the savings achieved by the union concession. Bud approaches his father to get union support for this change in company management. The situation takes a dramatic turn when Bud learns that Gekko plans to sell Bluestar’s assets and in the process leave Carl and all Bluestar staff unemployed, making Bud extremely wealthy as Bluestar’s president. Angry at Gekko’s decision and laden with guilt for being the scapegoat for Bluestar’s destruction, Bud chooses his father as a mentor and decides to thwart Gekko’s plans. Create a plan to keep Bluestar airlines out of Gekko’s reach.

Gekko eventually comes to know that Bud had designed the entire scheme. So the next day, when Bud returned to work in jubilation, everyone was curiously in a bad mood. He is confronted by the police and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), who had doubted Bud when they detected that he placed an unusually large purchase order for Teldar shares, which was monitored and therefore picked up by StockWatch. Bud is arrested, handcuffed, and taken out of the office in tears. In the end, Bud meets Gekko in Central Park, where Bud is brutally attacked by Gekko. Gekko in innocence while attacking him mentions his involvement in illegal business transactions

The pearl is a dream; it simply reflects what we deeply desire. It reflected what Kino desperately craved. I will be discussing kinos different perceptions throughout the novel, and how he slowly became corrupted by the pearl, which led to his moral downfall. My first argument would be how the doctor caused Kino to rethink his perceptions of the world, and how the doctor widened his perceptive in a debased way. My second argument would be how Kinos perceptions of the pearl made him a more violent and aggressive person, and how Kinos greed blinded him from what he already had which then led him to lose absolutely everything.

In this argument, I will be discussing how the doctor changed Kino, and how it changed his perception so quickly, which then led to Kino only focusing on the world’s value system. Kino first perceived the world as complete. He was content with what he had. He viewed his life as “perfect among mornings” He did not have any material wealth, he simply had his family and he appreciated them. As soon as Kinos child had gotten stung by the scorpion “in his mind a new song had come, a song of evil.” The scorpion is a symbol of death. The song of evil appears to be stronger than the song of the family, as evil triumphs over good. So yes the scorpion does play an important role in this novel, as it is the start of a huge change in Kinos life. The doctor has made an even bigger impact on Kino, as he gives Kinos perspective a power boost. The role of a doctor is idolized; people view doctors as successfully educated beings. They are perceived as great as upstanding heroes. Kino, on the other hand, is not educated nor successful therefore he does not fit into the world’s value system, and the world views people like Kino as less inferior or outclassed. Kino values the doctor’s culture over his own; as he respects the doctor because of the value the world gives to the doctor. “Have I nothing better to do than cure insect bites for ‘little Indians’? I am a doctor, not a veterinary.” When learning that Juana and Kino have brought their son for treatment, the doctor’s response shows his disregard for the indigenous people. He compares them to animals and mocks them, there was no care or empathy for the indigenous baby. The doctor has what the world values but still brings discontent. Kino looks up to the doctor; he strives for the type of lifestyle the doctor has. This makes him greedy. Yes, the doctor has material wealth, and approval from the world, but he doesn’t have the spiritual wealth Kino and his family endures. The doctor values stuff, not people. Kino sees the “vagueness of a dream” which is a mirage of wealth, and starts striving for that dream, although the doctor didn’t necessarily force Kino into thinking in that particular way, he did play an important role as to shaping kinos perceptions of the world and opening the doors of greed, which therefore changed his perspective.

In this argument, I will be discussing how Kinos perceptions about the pearl led him into thinking and acting more aggressively, and how he is consumed by the pearl and the materiality and greed it represents, instead of appreciating what he already had. “The “music of the pearl has merged with the music of the family.” The song of the pearl represents greed and how it can corrupt a person. The song of the family, the song of evil, and the song of the pearl all represent Kinos perceptions. As read both the sound of the pearl and the sound of the family have been merged. Kino wants the pearl to benefit for his family, which reflects the song of the family. He also wants it for more materialist things mainly clothing. He knew that it was the “pearl of the world” and while that title originally refers to the pearls great size and beauty, it also underscores the fact that having a pearl brings the outside world’s destructive influence into kinos simple life. It is “the pearl of what could be” he understands that the pearl will bring him wealth, which he can obtain an education for his son Coyotito, and thus a different life than he and his forefathers have had. In the pearl, Kino sees freedom from his life as a poor, insignificant exploited fisherman. “I am cheated, Kino cried fiercely.” Kino is trying to dominate with aggression as he hopes that the pearl will bring him freedom, the word “fiercely” used shows the violence coming out of him. Juana, on the other hand, has completely different views on the pearl, then Kino. She believes it brings evil, whereas Kino values it, as it is valuable. Kino regards them as “perfect as the moon.” He compares the pearl to the moon, but the moon itself is not glorious, it is only glorious because it can reflect the sun, in the same way, the pearl reflects the values of the world. The pearl itself is not a value; the value is how the world sees the pearl. It is “the pearl of what could be” because it is only a reflection. Kino then focuses only on the pearl, not on his family. The pearl was a “complete illusion” to Kino as it was simply a mirage of what he deeply desired. Civilization is an illusion, that’s why Kino thinks that the pearl as valuable and will bring happiness, but the reality is that it brings discontent. It’s just a dream that always keeps you wanting more. After a while, Kino becomes the enemy, and the pearl becomes the destruction. Kino is now prepared to kill to save the pearl, he now doesn’t value his family, he just values the pearl, as he is blinded by the pearl and doesn’t understand the destruction it holds. His greed for the pearl goes to the extent of killing. Kinos character and values are changing completely. When Juana said, “Kino…I am afraid. A man can be killed. Let us throw the pearl back into the sea.” He then says “hush,[he said fiercely]. I am a man. Hush.” This quote supports the idea because it shows the aggression he is starting to portray, mainly by the word “fiercely.” His wife realizes that the pearl holds evilness and danger, but Kino overcome by the greed the pearl brought him, insists that he can fight it. Therefore, Kinos greed and his perceptions of the pearl caused him to be a more violent person, which ultimately led to his downfall.

To conclude, Kinos perceptions of the doctor and the pearl reflected the change in him. He perceived the doctor has wealthy and successful, which made him greedy. His perceptions of the doctor led him into the world’s value system and got him more absorbed of the thought of wealth. He became just like the doctor, which ultimately led to Kino’s change. The pearl on the other hand reflected what Kino desperately craved; he craved wealth, and approval from the world. It also reflected his anger and violence towards what he already had which is family. His attitude changed. He didn’t value his family, he only valued the pearl. So in the end Kino did not gain anything he ironically lost everything even though he had the pearl, which is believed to hold everyone’s desires.

Money is one of the most significant fundamental factors that influence social customs; it makes people greedy and corrupt; even worse, it causes family collapse. Due to the background of ‘The Rocking-Horse Winner’, it is the period of Western industrial civilization where materialism is extraordinarily prevalent and money is the symbol of social status.

In the introductory paragraph, Lawrence makes it clear that the story will revolve around money or lack of it. Through the following plot, it is not difficult to find that the Hester family is not poor; they just do not have enough money to appear as luxurious as Hester wishes. Paul’s family belongs to the middle class, but his parents still maintain the taste of upper-class life to keep the social hierarchy with material things. Hester’s reckless spending compared to her husband’s moderate income creates debt for the family. Accompanied by this debt is the constant anxiety about how the family will appear to the neighbors and society. The pressure for money and to maintain a certain status and lifestyle creates greed and tension in the house. Therefore, “the house came to be haunted by the unspoken phrase: There must be more money! There must be more money!” (Lawrence, 221). The lines of this ‘haunting’ are repeated throughout the story. Although they do not seem to be spoken audibly by family members, the words are felt by the children, the mother, and even Uncle Oscar. It is connoting the family’s constant desire and greed, as well as the fear of falling into the middle class.

As the story goes on, Paul’s desire for approval from his mom also leads to greed. “He said stoutly, ‘I’m a lucky person’, and asserted that ‘God told me’” (Lawrence, 222). Paul recognizes that his mother does not love him but money, so he becomes obsessed with luck, particularly luck that leads to financial gain, proving to Hester that he is lucky and hoping to receive his mother’s love. Paul starts riding his rocking horse until he loses his mind as if it was telling him which horse he should bet on in upcoming horse races. To stop the house from whispering about the family’s endless greed for more money, Paul rides his horse every time before a horse race.

Unfortunately, Paul’s hard-earned money does not lift his mother’s spirits. “As his mother read it, her face hardened and became more expressionless. Then a cold, determined look came on her mouth” (Lawrence, 229). Instead, she wants more. Lawrence demonstrates here that greed can never be satisfied as long as the greed itself is unquenchable; no amount of money will truly satisfy it. Once Hester has the money, “The voices in the house suddenly went mad, like a chorus of frogs on a spring evening. There were certain new furnishings, and Paul had a tutor. He was really going to Eton, his father’s school, in the following Autumn” (Lawrence, 230). Instead of paying off her debts, Hester buys new furniture and takes Paul to Eton, which is one of the most prestigious all-boys boarding schools in the world, representing Hester’s strong vanity and the pursuit of social status.

Judging a family by its appearance is not surprising during the period of Western industrial civilization. Everyone wants to rise in status and power by hook or by crook. Although some people may not have the ability to demonstrate the social hierarchy, they always tend to pretend that. If not, sarcasm and discrimination from other people may be the consequence. Referring to the ‘Gosford Park’, Lady Mabel is mocked for not having a maid. Lady Lavinia says that a woman who travels with no maid has lost her self-respect, and calls her dress an ugly skirt. Moreover, when Mary tells people that she is hired because Constance plans to train her, Elsie says: “She didn’t want to pay for it. You mean”. This illustrates that Constance is not as wealthy as the audience thought, and it can be seen that to maintain her social status, she needs William’s relief. Ostentatious clothing and extravagant spending are just propping that help Constance camouflage her identity.

At the end of ‘The Rocking-Horse Winning’, when Paul died, Uncle Oscar said, “My God, Hester, you’re eighty-odd thousand to the good, and a poor devil of a son to the bad. But, poor devil, he’s best gone out of a life where he rides his rocking horse to find a winner” (Lawrence, 235) These lines are the last in the short story. They epitomize the problematic greed that Lawrence criticizes throughout the story. Oscar implies to Hester that she is rich now with a fortune of eighty thousand pounds, and would no longer have to deal with an unfit son. Oscar does not care much about Paul, even though he is his nephew and helps him win thousands of pounds. Oscar just uses Paul as a tool to make money. Also, it is worth mentioning that Lawrence did not even show Hester’s reaction when Paul died. Instead, Lawrence describes how Uncle Oscar compares the worth of the boy’s life to race winnings relentlessly and immediately decides that the money is worth more. This case shows the danger of taking greed and materialism to the extreme. Human life is lost in the pursuit of wealth and luck, and the family is mostly apathetic about it. The lack of communication and intimacy are given evidence at the beginning, in which the children do not speak to each other about the voices, but only share significant eye contact. Hester also shows her materialism in that she buys expensive toys for the children rather than providing them with real intimacy.

In conclusion, greed can never be satisfied as long as the greed itself is unquenchable; no amount of money will truly satisfy it; the lust for money grows stronger as the number of money increases, which is demonstrated in ‘The Rocking-Horse Winner.’ Furthermore, excessive materialism splits love between people, which is demonstrated in Paul and Hester. To satisfy his mother’s desire for money, the pursuit of his mother’s love and luck leads Paul to form a wrong outlook on life, values, and morality. He is willing to sacrifice happiness and life as a child to fulfill the desires of an adult.

Money has many names, and with that, it’s been called many things. It has been said to be the root of all evil, and that it rules the world of today. Money, most of the time, represents power. It allures us with its enchanting faces and the public’s perception of it as something wonderful. However, money is not the source of all evil. Rather, it is only when our own desires tarnish the image of money.

Deep inside our hearts, every person harbors an irrational desire for something. And that desire causes us to lose our reasoning and become engulfed by it. Behind all of that, a certain deleterious feeling we occasionally have is referred to as greed. Greed is the ego’s constant desire for more, and more for oneself. It also implies that it is unconcerned about the pain and misery or hardships of others, even if obtaining valuables or cash brings negative impacts to others. As a result, it is people’s egos that are at the root of evil. Money is a resource that is widely accepted as a medium of economic exchange. It is the medium through which prices and values are expressed in terms of currency. Money is fairly invisible by itself. It would be irrelevant if it were not comprehended and put to use. In other words, we impose evil by giving it meaning and striving to obtain more of it, relying on this symbolic importance without due consideration for other people.

Aristotle and Plato, philosophers thousands of years ago, assumed that greed and desires for material wealth would come at the cost of one’s ethics and that greed would be at the root of moral corruption. As per Aristotle, money was created to be used in exchange rather than to grow at interest. Because money’s purpose is to enable exchanges whose end goal is the transfer of useful and valuable goods, those who exchange it for more money alter the end that money was designed to support, and thus connect in unusual deals of the most despised kind.

Numerous people have harmed the reputation of money. Money, on the other hand, is not the root of all evil. Rather, greed motivates people to commit vile acts, money is merely a tool, and what emphasizes our world is our connections. If we humans had grasped the essence of morality in our lives, greed would not cover our hearts in the face of success, preventing us from falling into sin.